• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle

  • 5too@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzscience
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    As I understand it, publishing lets others validate the science. You’re not just declaring what you’ve discovered, you’re showing your work - your sources, your data, your references, your processes.

    After you’ve done all that, even if it’s crap, someone else expressing an interest in going through all that can be quite a compliment. Or, if you didn’t bother dotting all the i’s and crossing all the t’s, it can make you a mite defensive…

    But yes, a lot of trash can be published. And since it is published, it can be shown to be trash, if someone goes to the trouble.





  • 5too@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzSpyhoppin'
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Go dunk your head! Seriously, you can see the effect in a pool - look at how well you can see things above and below the surface, go underwater, and open your eyes. Things will be fuzzier.

    You’re trying to reason away an effect that people actually see, and that you can verify independently. That’s the opposite of how science works.

    For a scientific explanation, my first Google got came up with this - an article about some kids who do seem to see normally underwater. It also includes this explanation for our blurrier experience:

    When the eye is immersed in water, which has about the same density as the cornea, we lose the refractive power of the cornea, which is why the image becomes severely blurred